(Grand Chamber) The claimant objected that the court had admitted in evidence a statement taken from him not under caution by police officers already knowing that he had made other self incriminating statements, and having deliberately chosen not to caution him.
The Grand Chamber explicitly rejected the submission that a restriction not justified by compelling reasons automatically results in a violation of Article 6; the fairness of proceedings as a whole must be taken into account.
Citations:
50541/08 (Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) : Court (Grand Chamber)), [2016] ECHR 750, CE:ECHR:2016:0913JUD005054108, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0913JUD005054108, (2016) 61 EHRR 9
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights
Jurisdiction:
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – Shepherd v Regina CACD 20-Jun-2019
Not unfair to admit statement whilst not a suspect
The defendant was in charge of a boat on the Thames. He was intoxicated as was his girlfriend. He was speeding, and allowed her to take the controls. She crashed the boat and died from her injuries. He absconded from bail, and was convicted of gross . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights, Criminal Evidence
Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.569460